The Commissioner of Education will dismiss an application or appeal involving an officer and, or, a member of the staff of a school district for improper service of the complaint and, or, lack of subject matter jurisdiction
Decisions of the Commissioner of Education, Decision #17,002
Addressing the issue of "improper service" of the complaint, the Commissioner explained that the application must be dismissed because there was no personal service of the application on officers and employee as necessary parties where the rights of such an officer or staff member would be adversely affected by a determination of an appeal in favor of a applicant.
Decisions of the Commissioner of Education, Decision #17,002
Addressing the issue of "improper service" of the complaint, the Commissioner explained that the application must be dismissed because there was no personal service of the application on officers and employee as necessary parties where the rights of such an officer or staff member would be adversely affected by a determination of an appeal in favor of a applicant.
With respect to issues in the application or appeal involving subject matter jurisdiction of the Commissioner:
1. To the extent that an application alleges discrimination on constitutional grounds, an appeal to the Commissioner is not the proper forum to adjudicate issues of constitutional law or to challenge the constitutionality of a statute or regulation and the complaint must be presented to a court of competent jurisdiction if otherwise timely.
1. To the extent that an application alleges discrimination on constitutional grounds, an appeal to the Commissioner is not the proper forum to adjudicate issues of constitutional law or to challenge the constitutionality of a statute or regulation and the complaint must be presented to a court of competent jurisdiction if otherwise timely.
2. To the extent that an application raises claims that do not arise under Education Law, such as defamation, the Commissioner of Education lacks jurisdiction over such claims, which may be raised in a court of competent jurisdiction if otherwise timely.
3. To the extent that an appeal to the Commissioners pursuant to Education Law §310 alleges claims under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 or the Americans with Disabilities Act, an appeal to the Commissioner is not the appropriate forum to adjudicate such claims.
4. To the extent that the application asks the Commissioner to provide for an investigation concerning the issues giving rise to the application, a petition submitted to the Commissioner for adjudication is appellate in nature and does not provide for investigations.
5. To the extent that applicant seeks an award of monetary damages, the Commissioner has no authority to award monetary damages, costs or reimbursements in an appeal filed pursuant to Education Law §310.
6. To the extent that the applicant seeks an apology from an officer of staff member, the Commissioner lacks the authority to order a member of a board of education or a school district employee to issue an apology.
Finally, as relevant in this appeal, the decision notes that in the interest of judicial economy, the Commissioner of Education will not entertain an appeal while there is an action pending in another forum involving the same issues and seeking similar relief.